God can write straight with crooked lines.

[Limnor]

“If a person’s conscience were functioning properly, it would produce roughly the same conclusions as mine.”

[Gadianton]

I’d agree that leaving an authoritative institution means taking ownership of one’s moral commitments. I wouldn’t say that “creates” a moral compass from scratch—conscience was already there, and in fact may have been part of the removal process. Deciding whether prophetic authority is genuine seems like it should require conscience rather than a need to relinquish or ignore it.

Absolutely, there is no clean transition here. I would point out that while Mormonism is broadly authoritarian, it's not like living on the Sea Org. Or even being in the military. In fact, I almost want to say that Mormonism has far more to do with peer pressure than commands from leaders. For the most part, revelation has ceased, the leaders simply don't say anything and member culture fills in the gaps. Most members don't know that they can tell their Bishop to pound sand on tithing, they can pay straight to SLC, decline tithing settlement, and say whatever they want at the TR interview. It's nearly all "don't ask don't tell". Mormonism has evolved into a strange sort of relativism where "every member does that which seems right in their own eyes." Some pay 10% others pay 1%. MG drinks tea whereas my parents would have shuddered at the thought. I would have to say that devout members may be naïve and prone to affinity fraud, but it doesn't seem to have much to do with disciplined scripture reading and memorizing dogma and orders from leaders. There is a social emphasis on position and authority. It's less likely that a member will be "told what to do" by a high ranking leader and then execute the task as if they are in the military. It's more likely a member will be struck by gossip about what some high-ranking priesthood leader said in a meeting or revealed to somebody in confidence, who went out and straightaway broke the confidence. There is sort of a "leader worship" phenomena, which of course inspires some young guys like crazy to become leaders.

This is really bad. I had to watch my parents suffer because they were the guilt-ridden type, and the Church will give you the rope to hang yourself. They didn't understand things like "plausible deniability". But other members do. If you know how to play your cards, there is very little thinking being done for you by your leaders. The church has gotten to the point where all it really cares about is extracting as much money as possible. If you can keep your sins on the lowdown and not get ratted out and learn to deny everything, you can live a carefree and sinful life and even rise in leadership.

[Limnor]

This is really bad. I had to watch my parents suffer because they were the guilt-ridden type, and the Church will give you the rope to hang yourself. They didn't understand things like "plausible deniability". But other members do. If you know how to play your cards, there is very little thinking being done for you by your leaders. The church has gotten to the point where all it really cares about is extracting as much money as possible. If you can keep your sins on the lowdown and not get ratted out and learn to deny everything, you can live a carefree and sinful life and even rise in leadership.

So it’s less centralized command and control and more ambiguous guidance led by peer and near-peer enforcement. And rather than having that solid moral compass through authoritarian discipline you end up with high disparity of moral action. Which results in people with high conscience being crushed, and those willing to adjust their conscience thrive.

Sounds like a significant deviation from “those who leave lack a moral compass.”

[MG 2.0]

Let me be clear in case I have been misunderstood. Wouldn’t be the first time. I’m saying that when a person leaves the LDS Church and belief in God they create/find their own moral compass. Whatever it might be.

That’s about as far as I went with it.

Not true. You went on to say:

One decides, for example, whether they feel that it's OK to lie or not anytime that it may be convenient

So your flagship example of finding one's own moral compass is lying anytime that it might be convenient.

Not exactly what I said. If course, you already knew that.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

“If a person’s conscience were functioning properly, it would produce roughly the same conclusions as mine.”

Not necessarily, and therin lies the rub.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I’d agree that leaving an authoritative institution means taking ownership of one’s moral commitments. I wouldn’t say that “creates” a moral compass from scratch—conscience was already there, and in fact may have been part of the removal process. Deciding whether prophetic authority is genuine seems like it should require conscience rather than a need to relinquish or ignore it.

Absolutely, there is no clean transition here. I would point out that while Mormonism is broadly authoritarian, it's not like living on the Sea Org. Or even being in the military. In fact, I almost want to say that Mormonism has far more to do with peer pressure than commands from leaders. For the most part, revelation has ceased, the leaders simply don't say anything and member culture fills in the gaps. Most members don't know that they can tell their Bishop to pound sand on tithing, they can pay straight to SLC, decline tithing settlement, and say whatever they want at the TR interview. It's nearly all "don't ask don't tell". Mormonism has evolved into a strange sort of relativism where "every member does that which seems right in their own eyes." Some pay 10% others pay 1%. MG drinks tea whereas my parents would have shuddered at the thought. I would have to say that devout members may be naïve and prone to affinity fraud, but it doesn't seem to have much to do with disciplined scripture reading and memorizing dogma and orders from leaders. There is a social emphasis on position and authority. It's less likely that a member will be "told what to do" by a high ranking leader and then execute the task as if they are in the military. It's more likely a member will be struck by gossip about what some high-ranking priesthood leader said in a meeting or revealed to somebody in confidence, who went out and straightaway broke the confidence. There is sort of a "leader worship" phenomena, which of course inspires some young guys like crazy to become leaders.

This is really bad. I had to watch my parents suffer because they were the guilt-ridden type, and the Church will give you the rope to hang yourself. They didn't understand things like "plausible deniability". But other members do. If you know how to play your cards, there is very little thinking being done for you by your leaders. The church has gotten to the point where all it really cares about is extracting as much money as possible. If you can keep your sins on the lowdown and not get ratted out and learn to deny everything, you can live a carefree and sinful life and even rise in leadership.

I have to say, I never cease to be amazed at the insights critics have in regards to the church and its operations/members after they leave.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

This is really bad. I had to watch my parents suffer because they were the guilt-ridden type, and the Church will give you the rope to hang yourself. They didn't understand things like "plausible deniability". But other members do. If you know how to play your cards, there is very little thinking being done for you by your leaders. The church has gotten to the point where all it really cares about is extracting as much money as possible. If you can keep your sins on the lowdown and not get ratted out and learn to deny everything, you can live a carefree and sinful life and even rise in leadership.

So it’s less centralized command and control and more ambiguous guidance led by peer and near-peer enforcement. And rather than having that solid moral compass through authoritarian discipline you end up with high disparity of moral action. Which results in people with high conscience being crushed, and those willing to adjust their conscience thrive.

Sounds like a significant deviation from “those who leave lack a moral compass.”

Oh my, and then we have this.

Regards,
MG

[Everybody Wang Chung]

I’d agree that leaving an authoritative institution means taking ownership of one’s moral commitments. I wouldn’t say that “creates” a moral compass from scratch—conscience was already there, and in fact may have been part of the removal process. Deciding whether prophetic authority is genuine seems like it should require conscience rather than a need to relinquish or ignore it.

Absolutely, there is no clean transition here. I would point out that while Mormonism is broadly authoritarian, it's not like living on the Sea Org. Or even being in the military. In fact, I almost want to say that Mormonism has far more to do with peer pressure than commands from leaders. For the most part, revelation has ceased, the leaders simply don't say anything and member culture fills in the gaps. Most members don't know that they can tell their Bishop to pound sand on tithing, they can pay straight to SLC, decline tithing settlement, and say whatever they want at the TR interview. It's nearly all "don't ask don't tell". Mormonism has evolved into a strange sort of relativism where "every member does that which seems right in their own eyes." Some pay 10% others pay 1%. MG drinks tea whereas my parents would have shuddered at the thought. I would have to say that devout members may be naïve and prone to affinity fraud, but it doesn't seem to have much to do with disciplined scripture reading and memorizing dogma and orders from leaders. There is a social emphasis on position and authority. It's less likely that a member will be "told what to do" by a high ranking leader and then execute the task as if they are in the military. It's more likely a member will be struck by gossip about what some high-ranking priesthood leader said in a meeting or revealed to somebody in confidence, who went out and straightaway broke the confidence. There is sort of a "leader worship" phenomena, which of course inspires some young guys like crazy to become leaders.

This is really bad. I had to watch my parents suffer because they were the guilt-ridden type, and the Church will give you the rope to hang yourself. They didn't understand things like "plausible deniability". But other members do. If you know how to play your cards, there is very little thinking being done for you by your leaders. The church has gotten to the point where all it really cares about is extracting as much money as possible. If you can keep your sins on the lowdown and not get ratted out and learn to deny everything, you can live a carefree and sinful life and even rise in leadership.

Excellent observations. +1

[Limnor]

So it’s less centralized command and control and more ambiguous guidance led by peer and near-peer enforcement. And rather than having that solid moral compass through authoritarian discipline you end up with high disparity of moral action. Which results in people with high conscience being crushed, and those willing to adjust their conscience thrive.

Sounds like a significant deviation from “those who leave lack a moral compass.”

Oh my, and then we have this.

Regards,
MG

It’s just an assessment of ecclesiastical structure and potential effects based on a former member’s description. Happy to be corrected if that’s not an accurate depiction of how it works.

[bill4long]

Given the somewhat broad nature of the OP topic, I'm curious what you think about two other churches...

1. The Church of Christ (Bickertonites). Descended from Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer, who determined that Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet.

2. The Church of Christ (Temple Lot.) Descendend from former Nauvoo apostle John E. Page.

Both groups hold the priesthood, have apostles, and believe in the Book of Mormon, but reject Joseph Smith's later revelations that made it in the Book of Commandments / Doctrine and Covenants. Both groups practice "spiritual gifts" such as speaking in tongues, prophetic utterances in the church, and (unlike the Brighamites) adhere to 3 Nephi 11:39,40.

Also have you ever been "visited with fire" from "the Father"?


Also curious, why would a devout Brighamite LDS gentle-person such as yourself be so inclined to discuss religion and spiritual matters with a bunch of, well, "apostates"?

I’ve expressed my reasons for participating on this board many times over the years. I might ask the same of you? Why do you participate on this board?

Of the restoration churches the CofJCofLDS seems to be fulfilling prophecy in much greater measure than the other restoration branches. I give it a ten out of ten.

Regards,
MG

You avoided my questions. Was that your intent?